3: Comment on the following in the light of at least 10 cases of honourable supreme court of Pakistan

clause A: " if we donot believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we donot believe in it at
all " Noam chomsky .

B:" I disaprove of what you say but I will

defend to the death your right to say it.
VoltaireArticle 10: Freedom of
expression
1. Home
2. Human Rights
3. The Human Rights Act
4. Article 10: Freedom of expression

Pages in this section

Article 10 protects your right to hold your own opinions

Article 10 protects your right to hold your own opinions and to express them freely without
government interference.

This includes the right to express your views aloud (for example through public protest and
demonstrations) or through:

 published articles, books or leaflets

 television or radio broadcasting
 works of art
 the internet and social media

The law also protects your freedom to receive information from other people by, for example,
being part of an audience or reading a magazine.

Are there any restrictions to this right?

Although you have freedom of expression, you also have a duty to behave responsibly and to
respect other people’s rights.

Public authorities may restrict this right if they can show that their action is lawful, necessary
and
Are there any restrictions to this right?
Although you have freedom of expression, you also have a duty to behave responsibly and to
respect other people’s rights.

Public authorities may restrict this right if they can show that their action is lawful, necessary
and proportionate in order to:

 protect national security, territorial integrity (the borders of the state) or public safety
 prevent disorder or crime
 protect health or morals
 protect the rights and reputations of other people
 prevent the disclosure of information received in confidence
 maintain the authority and impartiality of judges

An authority may be allowed to restrict your freedom of expression if, for example, you express
views that encourage racial or religious hatred.

However, the relevant public authority must show that the restriction is ‘proportionate’, in other
words that it is appropriate and no more than necessary to address the issue concerned.

Article 19 of the constitution of Pakistan 1973, provides the concept of freedom of speech.
Freedom of speech comes from the very heart of a natural right of a civilised societies to impart
and acquire information about their common interests. It had always helped an individual in self-
accomplishment, and led to discovery of truth.

It had further strengthened and enlarged the capacity of an individual to participate in decision
making, and provided a mechanism to achieve a reasonable balance between stability and social
change. Such freedom of speech is the foundation of a democracy and the concept of free
government of a free people.

Any attempt, by anyone, to impede, stifle or contravene such right would certainly fall foul of
the freedom guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution of Pakistan.

Constitution of Pakistan has secured the right to free speech, but had not left the same
unchecked, and had provided for reasonable restriction as postulated under Article 19 of the
Constitution. State has a compelling interest in regulating the right to speech when it comes in
conflict with the rights of other individuals, or in national interests. However, such restrictions
must be reasonable and must not violate the Constitution.
No one could be forced to listen or watch that he may not like to, and one cannot be invaded with
unsolicited interruptions while watching or listening to something of interest. In democratic societies,
Example
restrictions and duties co-exists in order to protect and preserve the right to speech.
case - Observer and The Guardian v United Kingdom [1991]
The Guardian and The Observer newspapers published excerpts from Peter Wright’s book
Spycatcher, which included allegations that MI5 had acted unlawfully.

The government obtained a court order preventing the newspapers from printing further material
until proceedings relating to a breach of confidence had finished.

But when the book was published, The Guardian complained that the continuation of the court
order infringed the right to freedom of expression.

The European Court of Human Rights said that the court order was lawful because it was in the
interests of national security.

However, it also said that that wasn't enough reason to continue the newspaper publication ban
once the book had been published, because the information was no longer confidential anyway.

This case summary is taken from ‘Human rights, human lives: a guide to the Human Rights Act
for

Unless the restriction struck a proper balance between the freedom of expression guaranteed by
Article 19 of the Constitution and the social control permitted thereby, it must be held to lack the
attributes of reasonableness. Government should therefore strike a just and reasonable balance
between the need for ensuring the people’s right of freedom of speech and protecting national
interests. Fundamental rights have been placed in the Constitution not merely to protect acts,
conduct and views that one may approve of but also, and especially, to protect views with which
one may disagree or which even find unpleasant or unacceptable.

Cluster of Fundamental Rights under the Constitution of Pakistan, such as, freedoms of
movement, speech, assembly, association and information etc. enjoy a unique symbiotic
relationship which nurtured democracy and strengthened political institutions.

t is important to understand that the public office is a public agency and a trust created in the
interest and for the benefit of the people of Pakistan and since an incumbent of a public office is
invested with certain powers and charged with certain duties pertinent to sovereignty, the powers
so delegated to the officers are held in trust for the citizens of Pakistan.

Such trust extends to all matters within the range of the duties pertaining to the office. A public
officer is amenable to the rule, which forbids an agent or trustee to place himself in such an
attitude. After all, public officers are nothing but the servants of the citizens of Pakistan.